"What's Good For GM Is Good For America....."

Saturday, July 01, 2006 at 04:36 AM

It was bound to happen sooner or later: General Motors is looking at a proposed merger with Nissan and Renault....

Surprised? I'm not.

"At this point, it is necessary that GM board and top management fully support this project in order to start the study of this opportunity after agreement of Renault and Nissan boards," the statement continued.

Translated version: "We're shitting cash so fast that just about anything looks better."

Not surprising; we are talking about a corporate giant that was dead last in safety glass, dead last in seat belts, dead last in airbags. Also, dead last in awareness of Global Warming and The Second Oil Peak, of course, which explains why their competitors already have better cars, whereas GM rolls out tanks for soccer moms, eh?

Long years ago, there was a corporate mantra about: "What's good for GM is good for America."

More like what ails GM is symptomatic of what ails all American businesses: Idiots at the helm, a tendency to do business like pimps and drug lords,a total disdain for their workers, and a good dose of telling the customers to go have sex with wall outlets. Sounds like a charming recipe for Chapter 11 to this redneck.

Perhaps such a merger may do some good, after all, and what's weird as hell, Nissan has actually built plants right here in America. Ain't that fucked up? And let's face it, Nissan does crank out a better product, and yes, they are very aware of the coming extinction of oil, thank you.

For Tracinda, the announcement suggests that Kerkorkian is looking for a way to replicate its success in helping forge the merger between the Chrysler Corp. and German carmaker Daimler-Benz in 1998.

Tracinda was the largest Chrysler shareholder at the time and Kerkorian walked away with a handsome profit after the deal was completed.

Ah, and then we consider that little factoid: A deal to make Kerkorian more money. Ain't that a strange? In the Raygun years, it was purchase a firm to break into smaller pieces, then sell off those pieces. These days, it's backwards, make money forcing big companies to become bloated whatevers. The logic of such escapes me.

But, would such a thing do wonders, such as teach GM management how to make cars and trucks people really want? How to cut costs? How to better deal with their workers?

I know, I ain't holding my breath, either.